Opinion
B167315.
11-18-2003
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOSE GUADALUPE NUNEZ, Defendant and Appellant.
Jose Guadalupe Nunez, in pro. per.; Richard L. Fitzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Jose Guadalupe Nunez appeals from judgment entered upon conviction following his negotiated plea of no contest to a carjacking charge. We appointed counsel to represent Nunez on appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues and asking this court to independently review the record. Acting in propria persona, appellant subsequently filed a supplemental letter brief setting forth his concern that the evidence did not support the statement of facts set forth in counsels brief. We conclude the brief adequately summarizes the testimony at the preliminary hearing and that no arguable issues exist.
BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Juan Castillejos testified he drove his car to the home of Mr. Willy to return some keys. Appellants two co-defendants, David Allatore and Johnny Perez, rode in the car with Castillejos, while appellant followed them on a bicycle. When they got out of the car in Mr. Willys neighborhood, one of the three defendants struck Castillejos from behind. All three defendants then began punching and kicking him. Appellant twisted Castillejoss arm behind his back until he released his car keys. Appellant got into Castillejoss car, and Castillejos ran away. He did not see anyone drive off in his car. Castillejos suffered injuries to his face, ribs, and wrist. At the time of the preliminary hearing, his face still hurt from his ear to his nose.
In accordance with the negotiated plea, the court sentenced appellant to three years in prison. Upon appellants request, the court issued a certificate of probable cause.
We appointed counsel to represent appellant on appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues and asked this court to independently review the record. On August 12, 2003, we advised appellant he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. On August 22, 2003, he filed a letter requesting substitution of counsel on the ground that the evidence did not support the statement of facts set forth in counsels brief. This court denied the request for substitution of counsel, but agreed to consider appellants letter as a supplemental brief.
DISCUSSION
Appellant complains of the following matters of a factual nature: the transcripts state the car was never stolen; he (presumably Castillejos) released the car to Lomeli in May, never reported it stolen, and in August decided to take over the car he sold; and "the facts on injury states [sic] otherwise," citing negative X-rays.
A review of the preliminary hearing transcript establishes that Castillejoss testimony fully supports the statement of facts set forth in the brief filed by appellants appointed attorney. Appellants attempt to create a factual dispute is of no consequence to the validity of his conviction, as his plea of no contest constituted an admission of every element of the charged offense. (People v. Hoffard (1995) 10 Cal.4th 1170, 1178.)
In addition to considering the above contentions, we have examined the entire record and are satisfied appellants attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: COOPER, P.J. and RUBIN, J.